If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The paradox of Terrorism

Recently the Republicans have amped up their talking point again on how Democrats and specifically President Obama are weak on Terrorism. With each new call of added protections we as a nation I believe just make the situation worse. It seems that just whispering the word terrorist nullify Constitutional protections. Even during the Bush administration terrorists had civilian trials. Now it seems we are just sliding down this slippery slope more and more, and with each rung we pass as we go further and further down this slope the Terrorists winning percentage goes up.
Here is a passage from a recent article in Slate by Dahlia Lithwick:

America has slid back again into its own special brand of terrorism-derangement syndrome. Each time this condition recurs, it presents with more acute and puzzling symptoms. . . .

Moreover, each time Republicans go to their terrorism crazy-place, they go just a little bit farther than they did the last time, so that things that made us feel safe last year make us feel vulnerable today. . . . In short, what was once tough on terror is now soft on terror. And each time the Republicans move their own crazy-place goal posts, the Obama administration moves right along with them. . . .

We're terrified when a terror attack happens, and we're also terrified when it's thwarted. We're terrified when we give terrorists trials, and we're terrified when we warehouse them at Guantanamo without trials. If a terrorist cooperates without being tortured we complain about how much more he would have cooperated if he hadn't been read his rights. No matter how tough we've been on terror, we will never feel safe enough to ask for fewer safeguards. . . .

But here's the paradox: It's not a terrorist's time bomb that's ticking. It's us. Since 9/11, we have become ever more willing to suspend basic protections and more contemptuous of American traditions and institutions. The failed Christmas bombing and its political aftermath have revealed that the terrorists have changed very little in the eight-plus years since the World Trade Center fell. What's changing -- what's slowly ticking its way down to zero -- is our own certainty that we can never be safe enough and our own confidence in the rule of law.

If you want to see the definition of "soft", you should see how we are dealing with pirates. I wish I could elaborate, but I'm in it right now and can't. But suffice it to say that we are expending tons of resources, but accomplishing little, because the bad guys know we aren't really serious.
On the other hand, they take the Russians and the Chinese very seriously.

Matt McKenzie

"Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is probably the reason why so few engage in it." Henry Ford

But it's not just the establishment that opposes closing Guantanamo, trying Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, or reading Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab his Miranda rights. Polls show most Americans want Abdulmutallab tried by military commission, want Gitmo to remain open, and want KSM tried in a military commission, too. For those of us who are horrified by the latest Republican assault on basic legal principles, it's time to reckon with the fact that the American people are terrified enough to go along.

The author sure has some contempt for the American people. I mean, afterall, they're just so stupid that they can be lead by their nose by the nearly-powerless minority party. What dupes, eh, Cotts?

What a partisan crap wiper that article is. Perhaps the author hasn't read the paper lately and seen quite a few influential Dems lining up to oppose civilian trials or complaining about how the panty bomber was treated. It's not just Republicans standing up for common sense; but a plurality of Americans.

From the author's conclusion:

Since 9/11, we have become ever more willing to suspend basic protections and more contemptuous of American traditions and institutions.

I ask you, Cotts, to name some of the basic protection you, personally, have been deprived of since 9/11. How 'bout some examples of American traditions/institutions that we're now collectively contemptuous of. Thanks.

The author sure has some contempt for the American people. I mean, afterall, they're just so stupid that they can be lead by their nose by the nearly-powerless minority party. What dupes, eh, Cotts?

What a partisan crap wiper that article is. Perhaps the author hasn't read the paper lately and seen quite a few influential Dems lining up to oppose civilian trials or complaining about how the panty bomber was treated. It's not just Republicans standing up for common sense; but a plurality of Americans.

From the author's conclusion:

I ask you, Cotts, to name some of the basic protection you, personally, have been deprived of since 9/11. How 'bout some examples of American traditions/institutions that we're now collectively contemptuous of. Thanks.

Your argument about the article has nothing to do with what she said. It is simply just a personal attack against her because of your difference of opinion. Be critical of what she said, and not what she is.

It is hard to say if I have lost any of my personal protections, I am not sure that I might not have been wiretapped or have had my personal e-mails hacked, You can't tell me I haven't, so I just don't know.

Finally,it is not a hard concept to grasp that the Constitution has the final say when it comes to matters of law. It is easy to disregard when the choices are difficult or when the media or unprincipled politicians get caught up in a mob mentality, but it's true value is demonstrated precisely during these times. When we stray from those principles we do so at our own peril.

It is hard to say if I have lost any of my personal protections, I am not sure that I might not have been wiretapped or have had my personal e-mails hacked, You can't tell me I haven't, so I just don't know.

I can't tell you that aliens don't read your thoughts, either. Does that mean you should wear a tinfoil hat?

So I guess what you're saying is that, no, you have not been deprived of any rights or freedoms since 9/11. Thanks.

These folks want us dead, it is just that simple. I have no problem with our government using whatever they need to keep us safe. From wire tapping to advanced methods of interrogations to racial profiling.

Franco,
interesting signature line. I was wondering how that would play out in NOLA. My thought was, its a win-win situation. Either their team wins, or their favorite son wins. Either way, it's party time on rue Bourbon! Faissez les bon temps roulez!!!

We just booked our birthday trip for May. I can never get Louisiana out of my blood! Love NOLA, but equally love the many no-name crawfish huts scattered across the land as well. What a place!

Franco,
interesting signature line. I was wondering how that would play out in NOLA. My thought was, its a win-win situation. Either their team wins, or their favorite son wins. Either way, it's party time on rue Bourbon! Faissez les bon temps roulez!!!

We just booked out birthday trip for May. I can never get Louisiana out of my blood! Love NOLA, but equally love the many no-name crawfish huts scattered across the land as well. What a place!

May is shrimp season, got to love those big juicy prawns boiled in cawgish/shrimp boil. I'm boiling 200 pounds of crawfish for the game tomorrow then will retire to my Lazyboy for kickoff.

We love the Mannings and there are a lot of Colts and Giants here. However, we love our Saints even more so, I hope Peyton has a bad afternoon tomorrow.